No free to play option?

Comments

Even Pantheon gives you a free trial till level 10, thats the plan for launch. Between CF and CU, Im not sure what one should get my money for PvPing. I used to play EQ1 for PvE and DAoC for RvR. Would be funny if I ended up doing the same between Pantheon and CU. A trial would help me decide. =-P

Helps deter gold spammers, unless of course they're using stolen CC#s. Should still keep the RMTs lower than typical F2P.

Having a sub has never stopped gold sellers, look at WoW, when ESO was sub only they had tons of gold sellers and bots. WoW constantly sues gold sellers yet you can still buy gold. Most people don't realise how much money they make, the good ones don't need to use stolen cc#s, look at a gold seller being interviewed.

Gold sellers are even bypassing char creation and just hacking the chat. Without even logging in they send their gold selling messages right into the game server. No matter what steps you take to stop gold sellers, gold sellers will always find a work around. my.com thought making a game where you could not trade with people at all would stop gold sellers. Nope, they just advertised in game and took money on product they could not trade you.

Even Pantheon gives you a free trial till level 10, thats the plan for launch. Between CF and CU, Im not sure what one should get my money for PvPing. I used to play EQ1 for PvE and DAoC for RvR. Would be funny if I ended up doing the same between Pantheon and CU. A trial would help me decide. =-P

I'd rather pvp over content, dungeons and raid mobs for progression in Pantheon than over castles and keeps in CU or CF.

That said, I will still play both games for all they're worth if they become available first.

Even Pantheon gives you a free trial till level 10, thats the plan for launch. Between CF and CU, Im not sure what one should get my money for PvPing. I used to play EQ1 for PvE and DAoC for RvR. Would be funny if I ended up doing the same between Pantheon and CU. A trial would help me decide. =-P

I'd rather pvp over content, dungeons and raid mobs for progression in Pantheon than over castles and keeps in CU or CF.

That said, I will still play both games for all they're worth if they become available first.

I would need to see the rule sets Pantheon has to offer. Myself being a DAoC fan, I love taking down castles and keeps. CF and CU both offer that. What to pick? A trial could go a long way to earning business.

I have heard that there is no free to play option and I am a little concerned about this. I realize that some people see this as a cover charge that keeps out the trouble makers. Maybe that is true, however I wonder how many people will pay $15 without some way of trying the game out to see if they like it.

What if the free to play players were used in a way that strengthens the game? I do not know what the max player limit for a server is but lets say its a little over 3000. However, during some parts of the day the server will have less than 2000 players on it? CSE could allow free to play players to log in to any server that has less than 2000 currently playing on it. If the population goes over 2000 then no new free to play players can log on. If the server goes over 2500 then the game forces free to players on over 3 hours to log out.

This would help in two ways. It would give people a chance to try the game out for free to see if they like it. It would also help to prop up populations on any server that is currently below its desired player size.

No

"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

I have heard that there is no free to play option and I am a little concerned about this. I realize that some people see this as a cover charge that keeps out the trouble makers. Maybe that is true, however I wonder how many people will pay $15 without some way of trying the game out to see if they like it.

What if the free to play players were used in a way that strengthens the game? I do not know what the max player limit for a server is but lets say its a little over 3000. However, during some parts of the day the server will have less than 2000 players on it? CSE could allow free to play players to log in to any server that has less than 2000 currently playing on it. If the population goes over 2000 then no new free to play players can log on. If the server goes over 2500 then the game forces free to players on over 3 hours to log out.

This would help in two ways. It would give people a chance to try the game out for free to see if they like it. It would also help to prop up populations on any server that is currently below its desired player size.

I'm thrilled it's not free to play, and I wouldn't be a founding backer if it was. Free to play makes it far too easy to be an asshat and laugh off bans. It also allows constant churn of bot accounts and spambots.